Over the last month, the escalation of the conflict between the U.S. and North Korea has seriously threatened the social peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. For the first time in 20 years, the U.S. government is seriously considering the launch of a preemptive strike against North Korean nuclear facilities to reduce its nuclear capacity.

In a recent visit to South Korea, the U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said in a quixotic statement,

“Certainly we do not want to, for things to get to the military conflict,…If they elevate the threat of their weapons program to a level that we believe requires action, then that option’s on the table.”

“Let me be very clear: the policy of strategic patience has ended. We are exploring a new range of security and diplomatic measures.”

On the face of Tillerson’s threats, the young North Korean Supreme leader Kim Jon-Un has intensified his endeavors to endow the regime with a modern nuclear defense system capable of repelling any form of aggression.

According to the American Intelligence, the regime is in advanced stages of testing this new weapon, which will endow the regime with new military power. Further, this month, the North Korean government announced that it will test the above mentioned ballistic missile some time soon.

While the escalation of the conflict in the Korean Peninsula is reaching an unsustainable level, the weak South Korean government has merely suggested that North Korea is a global threat. These weak statements come after its former President Park Geun-Hye was impeached.

The North Korean regime has always used the same belligerent narrative against its enemies to repel any potential aggression. In fact, the continual American threats against North Korea, far from calming the situation, have encouraged the regime to adopt stronger bellicose positions.

Without a doubt, the North Korean development of new long-range ballistic missiles is bad news and should be halted somehow but always intelligently. For that to happen, the international community should soon present a new realistic nuclear disarmament program, including all of the parties involved in the conflict.

It is a fact that the North Korean regime is a tyrannical one, which punishes its citizens on a regular basis. However, it is hard to think that North Korea is willing to begin a conflict in the region because it would be a suicidal act.

Despite the fact that several countries think that a preemptive strike against North Korea is the best option at this point, the truth is that there are better alternatives that would not entail a potential war that could cause a real carnage in the region.

Over the last decade, the international community has routinely failed in its endeavors to normalize its relations with the North Korean regime. In part, this is due to the bellicose narrative directed at them by the U.S. However, this strategy has been demonstrated to be inefficient with “delusional” leaders such as Kim Jon-Un who has the courage of his convictions and will follow them to the bitter end.

China is probably the only country which can exert influence over the North Korean regime. Such being the case, to de-escalate the conflict in the region, the international community should count on the Chinese government.

Several experts gainsay this approach, on the grounds that China would never, in their opinion, cooperate with the international community to solve this conflict. However, the bottom line is, the Chinese government does not want North Korea to expand its nuclear arsenal. They know that a potential war in the region would jeopardize part of its territory.And if a North Korean failed launch accidentally drops a rocket on its territory it could cause countless casualties.

These developments are leading up to an inordinate mutual distrust between the two major powers in the world.

If there is one thing that is certain, it is that a preemptive war against North Korea would cause an undetermined number of casualties in the region. If it is true that the North Korean regime will never begin any war, it is also certain that if it ever feels attacked, the regime would then launch a mass ballistic missile attack against different locations (including South Korean and American military bases in Guam and Hawaii). Without a doubt, it would be devastating for the KoreanPeninsula, and would constitute a point of no return in the conflict, leaving a trail of devastation in its wake.

Whether you are from Europe, China, South Korea, or the US is not important anymore. The most important thing for one to better understand is that the potential outbreak of a new conflict on the Korean Peninsula would negatively impact on your everyday life.

By coming to this understand, every citizen of every country, first of all, is morally obliged to explain the conflict to the political cast of his or her country, and secondly, demand a change in their strategy on the North Korean conflict.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, both the national and the international media have frequently focused on Trump’s plans to target immigration and dismantle the existing health-care and education systems. However, most of them have ignored the fact that the real author of these plans is not Trump, but his principal advisor, Stephen Bannon, who is a despicable and intelligent person, and refuses any sort of prominence to focus on his work without raising suspicions.

Bannon demonstrated his intelligence and influence during the last presidential election when he was the person most responsible (a campaign chief) for planning Trump’s campaign that eventually led his victory. Bannon was also the personwho recommended that Trump use fierce rhetoric against immigration, the media, and the establishment. Without his presence there Trump would not have been elected President.

As if that were not enough, Bannon was recently selected by Trump to be on the National Security Council board. This group is responsible for advising President Trump regarding national security and foreign policy. Bannon’s presence there has raised increasing concerns among politicians and experts due to his lack of knowledge about security. Many think that he may try to mislead President Trump in order to achieve his personal goals. However, to better understand why experts and the international community have expresed concerns about Stephen Bannon, it is necessary to know his background.

Before working for Trump’s administration, Stephen Bannon was the executive chairman of Breitbart News LLC. An American news outlet linked to controversies and the mass fabrication of stories, intended to demonise gays, Muslims, immigrants and liberals. In addition, under Bannon’s leadership, the site has promoted racism, and anti-Muslim ideas, and it has been accused of white nationalism. Bannon once said:

“I think strong countries and strong nationalist movements in countries make strong neighbours.”“And that is really the building blocks that built Western Europe and the United States, and I think it’s what can see us forward.”

Breitbart has published dozens of stories accusing U.S. Muslims of sympathising with terrorism.The site has also mocked LGBTQ people, feminists and women, and has also denied the existence of climate change, insisted that Hillary Clinton aide Huma Abedin was an agent of the Muslim Brotherhood, and served as a propaganda arm for the Trump campaign.

Bannon has also promoted anti-Semitic conspiracies about globalist cabal of bankers.“We call ourselves ‘the Fight Club.’ You don’t come to us for warm and fuzzy,” said Bannon.

Banon has also expressed his concerns that the United States and the: “Judeo-Christian West” are in a war against an expansionist Islamic ideology. Speaking about Breitbart, Bannon has said:

“We’re the platform for the alt-right.” According to NPR, “The views of the alt-right are widely seen as anti-Semitic and white supremacist.”

Aside from his work as the executive chairman of Breitbart, Bannon has had a disturbing past. He is considered a supremacist who advocates for Alt-Right organisations from all over the world. Probably the most worrying thing is that Bannon has never hidden his global fascist vision and, according to his inner circles, he still praises those who led fascism in European countries such as Germany or Italy during the WWII.

Bannon’s ties with European fascism go further. During UK referendum on the European Union in 2016, Bannon used Breitbart’s propaganda machinery to advocate for Brexit while simultaneously praising Nigel Farage, the leader of UKIP (an anti-immigration political party) at the moment. However, his contact with emergent European Alt-Right political leaders did not finish there. Since the Brexit decision, Bannon has increased his contacts with other leaders such as Marine Le Pen (France) and Geert Wilders (the Netherlands), according to several European sources whose name cannot be revealed for security issues. Bannon and Marine Le Pen have met several times to discuss the potential creation of an international coalition to change the world if Le Pen wins the French elections.

Given that Le Pen has a good chance to win the French elections, she has become a global threat. Bannon, who is no longer the executive chairman at Breitbart’s news, has ordered them to initiate a propaganda campaign to weaken her opponents. In addition, Marine Le Pen has confirmed that she will imitate Trump’s Presidential campaign strategy. It is clear that Bannon is not limiting himself to setting up an authoritarian system in the U.S.; his vision goes [much] further. Apparently, he will not stop until such a system is created, or until his ideas and policies are spread worldwide.

While much of the American and the international media will continue to undervalue Bannon’s real influence, he will continue working quietly behind scenes, like a termite, slowly but unceasinglyplanning to plan his next move to achieve his life’s goal; a world governed by authoritarians united to spread fear,andto target, and persecute those who act and think differently.

“Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics…derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.”– Benjamin Franklin

Over the last two years, President Trump has maintained a brutal rhetoric full of hatred against the U.S. media. However, he had never crossed the red line until last Friday, when he decided to call the US media: “the real enemies of the American people.” This was rapidly perceived as an attempt to deepen the existing division and limit the freedom of the press in America. Despite the fact that President Trump had frequently attacked the media for years, it was the first time that he publicly usedbellicose rhetoric to do so. The Republican Senator John McCain said in an interview:

“I hate the press. I hate you especially,” McCain told NBC journalist Chuck Todd, who laughed.”The fact is, we need you.” Without a free media, “I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time,”

“I’m very serious now, if you want to preserve democracy as we know it, you have to have a free and many times adversarial press,” he continued. “Without it, I am afraid that we would lose so much of our individual liberties over time. That’s how dictators get started.”

“When you look at history, the first thing that dictators do is shut down the press,” he said.”And I’m not saying that President Trump is trying to be a dictator. I’m just saying we need to learn the lessons of history.”John McCain was not the only senator to respond Trump’s statement.

“According to Trump, if you want the truth, ignore everything except what he is saying. That’s what totalitarianism is all about.”

Aside from Bernie Sanders and John McCain, many other senators and millions of citizens have expressed their worries about what could be the first step to suppress the freedom of the press and the beginning of a drift towards authoritarianism in the U.S.The protection of the freedom of the press is one of the unique provisions in the Bill of Rights because it protects the freedom of an institution as well as that of individuals.Thomas Jefferson recognised that principle when he wrote to John Jay in 1786. Jefferson said:

“Our liberty cannot be guarded but by the freedom of the press, nor that be limited without danger of losing it.”

About one year later, Jefferson made his most famous pronouncement on the subject of freedom of the press when he wrote these words to Edward Carrington:

“The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them.”

Over the course of history, many nations and political organisations have utilised Trump’s strategy to criminalise the media in order to deploy a press and propaganda censorship to manipulate the public. It allows authoritarian leaders to falsify information that citizens receive. In the absence of neutral and objective information, people are unable to dissent with the political party in charge. It is also extended to the systematic suppression of views that are contrary to those of the government in power.

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.”– Adolf Hitler

Freedom of the press is essential to guarantee a healthy democracy, even if we sometimes disagree with some of the media’s news stories. Instead, the crushing of unique ideas is always bad and usually generates a high level of intolerance in a country. Diversity and open-mindedness are effective tools to avoid totalitarianism and develop critical thinking in a society. People should also learn from past mistakes, and remember that it is so easy to create a new authoritarian government, and once it is created, it becomes almost impossible to reverse it again.

For now, no one can argue that President Trump is a dictator because there is still some counterbalance, but no one should deny the fact that he is taking steps in such a direction. Unless someone stops him from limiting the freedom of the press, he may soon use it to deploy an authoritarian system to gain power and increase his manipulative capacity to mislead citizens.

Numerous republican and democratic senators have shown their willingness to take further actions to protect the freedom of the press if needed. However, Trump already counts on the support of his loyal entourage led by Bannon and millions of citizens who blindly believe him. A good example of the blindness of Trump’s supporters happened a few days ago, when during one of his meetings, Trump fabricated a story in order to mislead the public. He suggested that there had been a terrorist attack in Sweden. Despite the fact that it was quickly refuted by the Swedish government, most of Trump’s supporters believed it and still think it was real.

Over the last few months, Trump’s supporters have been radicalised. If it is not halted, they will soon be willing to defend President Trump (including using armed force) regardless of any circumstance. This could prevent senators to take further action (including impeachment) against the President if he ever decides to limit the freedom of the press, since they would fear harsh reaction and conflict. Due to these circumstances, Americans will now have the responsibility for leading the opposition to Trump’s actions of bigotry.

Obsolete political parties such as the Democratic party will be resigned to a second position without any influential power to change the existing situation. It is important to remember that at the end of the day, and despite performances, the Democratic Party tends to betray their own words, as well as the millions of citizens who thought they could change the system for the better by voting for them. So the question now is: what will happen? Will American citizens allow President Trump to deploy an authoritarian system, which could potentially abolish people’s rights? Will they allow the Democratic Party to be led by Clinton or her entourage to do so instead? Or will they take other sorts of actions this time to really protect their rights and pursue more freedom? Whatever the decision will be, the most important thing is that citizens will have the last word, whether they know it or not. Every day that Trump is in office and allowed to manipulate American citizens, is another day that the authoritarian regime moves closer.

Over the last few months, President Trump has declared himself the person who will lead the international community in eliminating Islamic terrorism.However, his cabinet, led by CIA director Mike Pompeo, has started to strengthen its collaboration with Saudi Arabia (a state sponsor of terrorism).

Trump’s administration has also reported that they are preparing a $300m (£240m) package for precision-guided weapons technology for Riyadh (Saudi Arabia, a state sponsor of terrorism). At this point, the central question is how will Trump eradicate Islamic terrorism if he is arming those who sponsor and fund terrorism?

By collaborating with the Saudi government, Trump is indirectly funding terrorism and betraying millions of citizens who elected him to fight terrorism. Trump’s actions not only affect Americans, but also represent a global threat, particularly for Western countries.

Saudi Arabia governs based on an extreme interpretation of Sharia law (Islamic law widely compared to ISIL). The Saudi regime has also spent over $100 billion on exporting and implementing Sharia law worldwide. To succeed, it uses charitable organisations which work in refugees camps and poor communities where uneducated and oppressed people are more susceptible to become radicalised. Besides, Saudi’s elites and business community are funding terrorism through organisations such as the International Islamic Relief, an institution created to hide the illegitimate funding of terrorism from the international community. Wikileaks reported:

“…donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”

The U.S. intelligence services have always been aware that the Saudi regime has been collaborating with terrorist groups. In addition, it suggested that the Saudi Arabian government could have indirectly funded 9/11 (mostly perpetrated by Saudi Arabian citizens).

In conclusion, President Trump fully acknowledges that Saudi Arabia is exporting and funding terrorism worldwide. However, he is not taking any steps towards halting it. Instead, he has decided to strengthen the relationship between the U.S. and the Saudi regime by keeping several businesses in operation and providing them with arms. When President Trump was elected, he said:

“I am going to unite the civilised world to fight and eliminate Islamic terrorism”

Trump had a tremendous opportunity to take a step forward in seeking the elimination of Islamic terrorism. However, he has decided to prioritise his businesses with the Saudi regime before the security of millions of citizens. After this decision, the question is: How can Trump retain his legitimacy as President?

The fight against Islamic terrorism was Trump’s central promise during the last presidential campaign. It is evident that while Saudi Arabia funds terrorism, organisations such as ISIL and Al-Qaida will continue expanding their operational capacity. While this happens any collaboration with the Saudi regime will help terrorism and, the U.S. is collaborating with them.

So far, in just three weeks Trump has divided the country to levels not seen since the 60s, kept ties with his previous businesses directly or indirectly, and he has betrayed millions of American citizens by boosting terrorism.

For now, Trump will continue making controversial and unproductive decisions while millions of citizens will try to convince him to reverse them. For that reason, it is maybe time to ask oneself: if in just three weeks Trump has made unpardonable wrong decisions, what could happen after three or four years?

Remember to be reflective and honest with yourself when seeking an answer. Until then, you may try to convince your government to stop collaborating with Saudi Arabia and therefore indirectly with terrorism. There is still light at the end of the tunnel, however, it is gradually fading. You may consider taking (peaceful) strong actions before it is too late.

-Any sort of terrorism regardless of its political orientation should be eradicated as soon as possible-

In Upper New York Bay there stands the colossal Statue of Liberty, a universal symbol of freedom. She is also the Mother of Immigrants, embodying hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life in America. She stirs the desire for liberty in people all over the world. She represents the United States itself. However… In the last few weeks, the flame of freedom from her torch has started to flicker.In just two weeks, President Trump’s unlawful decisions and his unprecedented pressures on judges to rule in his favour have shaken the fundamentals of U.S. Democracy. For many, this indicates that Trump has hidden plans to turn the U.S. authoritarian to gain power. However, it won’t be possible without dominating the Supreme Court.The U.S. Supreme Court is the final court of appeal and final expositor of the Constitution of the United States. It marks the boundaries of authority between state and nation, state and state, and government and citizen. It has the jurisdiction to determine whether Trump’s decisions are unlawful or not.

The Supreme Court is composed of nine members, four of which are currently Republican, and the other four liberal. The recent nomination of Neil Gorsuch (a Republican) to sit on the Supreme Court has set off all alarms. His presidency would tilt the balance for Republicans, and it could help Trump to accumulate an absolute power.

Another indication of the U.S. transition into an authoritarian state is so-called alternative facts. Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer suggested that the U.S. government could “sometimes disagree” with real facts presented by the Media.

Trump started his attacks against the mainstream media during the last presidential campaign. Back then, several outlets plotted with Clinton and his aides to help her to win the election. Trump is now using it to fabricate stories to convince citizens that the only honest information comes from government sources.

As if this was not enough, on February 1, Republicans voted successfully to change the Congress rules to elect nominees without Democrats. It happened days later; Trump suggested them to “go nuclear” if Democrats tried to halt any of his decisions. Trump added:

“If we end up with that gridlock, I would say, if you can, Mitch, go nuclear,””Because that would be an absolute shame if a man of this quality was put up to that neglect,” he said of Gorsuch, a federal circuit court judge. “So I would say, it’s up to Mitch, but I would say go for it.”

As we can see, there are many indicators that Trump’s government has initiated the U.S. transition from democracy to authoritarianism. However, to dissipate doubts, one must compare Trump’s decisions with dictators from other countries. All authoritarian states share in common an underlying structure based in the re-centralization of power. The following list describes some basic structure of a dictatorship:

1.Little or no freedom of speech
2.No freedom to hold meetings without the approval of the government.
3.No freedom of movement-individuals needs documents/internal passports to move around inside the country.
4.No freedom to travel abroad.
5.No independent justice system.
6.Promote alternative facts and censor the Mainstream media.
7.Any opposition to the regime is punished.
8.Change rules of government’s institutions.

It is evident then that President Trump has already implemented several basic structures from the list to do a U-turn into an authoritarian state. He has started his crusade against the media, changed the rules of the Congress, attempted to end with the neutrality of the judicial system and violated the U.S. Constitution. However, while the flame of the freedom of the Statue of Liberty is still burning, there will be hope and citizens, union workers and organisations will have the last word…

Over the next few months, a sequence of events will determine the continued existence of the European Union. This year, both France and The Netherlands will hold crucial presidential elections. The rise of Alt-Right political parties in both countries such as the Front National (FN) led by Marine Le Pen in France and The Party for Freedom (PVV) led by Geert Wilders in the Netherlands could trigger the end of the European Union.

The first important test for the European Union will be on Wednesday, March 15, 2017, when the Netherlands will hold its presidential election. The anti-European Alt-Right candidate Geert Wilders has been leading all national election polls for several consecutive weeks. While his party currently holds 15 seats in the Dutch parliament, the latest poll now puts the PVV at 29– 33 seats, placing his party far ahead of the currently ruling Dutch Tories (VVD), who now consistently poll 23-27 seats. Wilders promised to hold a referendum on European Union membership as the UK did if he wins the Dutch general election of 2017. He thinks that the European Union is obsolete and opposes all immigration policies.

“We want to be in charge of our own country, our own money, our own borders, and our own immigration policy,” “As quickly as possible the Dutch need to get the opportunity to have their say about Dutch membership of the European Union,” Wilders said.

“It is time for a new start, relying on our own strength and sovereignty. Also in the Netherlands,” “If I become prime minister, there will be a referendum in the Netherlands on leaving the European Union as well. Let the Dutch people decide,” Wilders said.

Wilders’ plans to hold a referendum represent a real threat to the European Union, but it would not be the end of the project in any case. However, what most worries European leaders is Wilders’ intentions to violate human rights and international law on a regular basis whether the Netherlands remains part of the EU or not. So far, his statements indicate that he will not step back on his intentions to start his personal crusade against refugees and Muslims. It might open an identity crisis among the European Union members. Wilders has suggested numerous times that the Judeo-Christian culture is superior to other cultures from all over the world.

“Our Judeo-Christian culture is far superior to the Islamic one. I can give you a million reasons. But here is an important one. We have got humour and they don’t. There is no humour in Islam. .. Islam does not allow free speech because free speech shows how evil and wrong Islam is. And Islam does not allow humour because humour shows how foolish and ridiculous it is,” Wilders said.

“We want to stop all immigration from Islamic countries. We want to stimulate voluntary re-emigration to Islamic countries. We want to expel all criminals with dual citizenship and deprive them of their Dutch nationality. We want to de-islamize our nation. Dear Friends, there is a lot of work to do. We, the defenders of freedom and security, have an historic duty. Our generation has been entrusted with a huge task: To oppose Islam and keep the flame of liberty burning. I say it without exaggeration: the future of human civilisation depends on us. Now is a time when everyone in the West must do his duty. We are writing history here. So, let us do our duty. Let us stand with a happy heart and a strong spirit. Let us go forth with courage and save freedom,” said Wilders.

“The Netherlands have become a sick country.” “I am not a racist and neither are my voters. This sentence proves that you judges are completely out of touch. Support for the Party for Freedom is stronger than ever and keeps growing every day. The Dutch want their country back,” Wilders said.

“Today I was convicted in a political trial which, shortly before the elections, attempts to neutralise the leader of the largest and most popular opposition party. But they will not succeed, not even with this verdict, because I speak on behalf of millions of Dutch,” Wilders said.

“No, I think we need to renegotiate with the EU because I want to see French sovereignty restored in France, supported by a referendum.”

“If I am voted in, I will announce that a referendum will be held in six months time. I will spend those six months going to the European Union and telling them: ‘I want the French people to regain at least their territorial sovereignty because I want to control the borders – they don’t belong to you.’”

“The EU is deeply harmful, it is an anti-democratic monster. I want to prevent it from becoming fatter, from continuing to breathe, from grabbing everything with its paws and from extending its tentacles into all areas of our legislation. In our glorious history, millions have died to ensure that our country remains free. Today, we are simply allowing our right to self-determination to be stolen from us,” Le Pen said.

“The progressive Islamisation of our country and the increase in political-religious demands are calling into question the survival of our civilisation,”said Le Pen.

“For those who want to talk a lot about World War II, if it’s about occupation, then we could also talk about it (Muslim prayers in the streets), because that is occupation of territory,” she said at the gathering in Lyon.

“It is an occupation of sections of the territory, of districts in which religious laws apply. It’s an occupation,” Le Pen said.

“There are of course no tanks, there are no soldiers, but it is nevertheless an occupation and it weighs heavily on local residents,” said Marine Le Pen

In conclusion, this year will be full of threats and challenges for global society.The potential disintegration of the European Union represents one of these, but no one knows how it will end. History is full of threats and challenge that are often happily resolved. The elections in The Netherlands and France will be all about choosing between tolerance or intolerance, war or peace, friendship or enemies, future or past…Their citizens will have an enormous advantage since they can see what Trump is doing in the U.S. and based on that they will make an important decision that will change the world for the better or worse. Whether the European Union changes or not, what’s most important is that citizens will have the last word. Whatever your decision will be….Remember to think critically…And stand up for human rights.

Since President Trump and his entourage of advisors started their personal crusade against Muslims from SYRIA, IRAQ, IRAN, LIBYA, SOMALIA, SUDAN and YEMEN, there have been hundreds of peaceful refugees detained at airports from all across the U.S. (including green card holders)

Trump’s executive order suspending the entry of refugees into the U.S. constitutes a violation of international law and numerous human rights. According to the Geneva agreement:

“The core principle is non refoulement, which asserts that a refugee should not be returned to a country where they face serious threats to their life or freedom. This is now considered a rule of customary international law.”

As if that were not enough, Trump said in an interview:

“it has been “impossible, or at least very tough” for Syrian Christians to enter the United States.If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible and the reason that was so unfair — everybody was persecuted, in all fairness — but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.”

Such a statement implies a violation of the first amendment’s guarantee of religious freedom. However, President Trump said:

“This is not about religion – this is about terror and keeping our country safe.”

Since Trump signed the executive order, numerous elected republicans and democrats have also criticized Trump’s decision to persecute the Islamic community. So far, the elected republicans who have criticized the executive order are:

-Charlie Dent

-Jeff Flake

-Justin Amash

-Ben Sasse

-Susan Collins

-Barbara Comstock

-Rob Portman

-Orrin Hatch

-Dean Heller

-Brian Fitzpatrick

-Ileana Ros-Lehtinen

-Elise Stefanik

-Cory Gardner

-Will Hurd

-Leonard Lance

-Steve Stivers

-McCain

-Graham’s

McCain and Graham’s both released the following statement:

“Our government has a responsibility to defend our borders, but we must do so in a way that makes us safer and upholds all that is decent and exceptional about our nation.

“It is clear from the confusion at our airports across the nation that President Trump’s executive order was not properly vetted. We are particularly concerned by reports that this order went into effect with little to no consultation with the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security.

“Such a hasty process risks harmful results. We should not stop green-card holders from returning to the country they call home. We should not stop those who have served as interpreters for our military and diplomats from seeking refuge in the country they risked their lives to help. And we should not turn our backs on those refugees who have been shown through extensive vetting to pose no demonstrable threat to our nation, and who have suffered unspeakable horrors, most of them women and children.

“Ultimately, we fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism. At this very moment, American troops are fighting side-by-side with our Iraqi partners to defeat ISIL. But this executive order bans Iraqi pilots from coming to military bases in Arizona to fight our common enemies. Our most important allies in the fight against ISIL are the vast majority of Muslims who reject its apocalyptic ideology of hatred. This executive order sends a signal, intended or not, that America does not want Muslims coming into our country. That is why we fear this executive order may do more to help terrorist recruitment than improving our security.”

In response Trump tweeted:

The Democratic party has announced numerous protests and legal challenges over Trump’s executive order:

Hillary Clinton, who is the main person responsible for the rise of Trump has also criticized Trump’s action. However, her resignation as presidential candidate during the last campaign would have facilitated another government.

The international community has also criticised Trump’s executive order to persecute Muslims. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said:

“It’s not the time to build walls between nations.” “They have forgotten that the Berlin Wall collapsed many years ago,” “Even if there are walls between nations, they must be removed.”

In response, Rohani banned American citizens from entering Iran until President Trump steps back in his decision.

“The reception of refugees fleeing the war, fleeing oppression, is part of our duties,” French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault said.

“In an unstable and uncertain world, turning inward would be a dead end,” Hollande said he told Mr Trump in their first phone conversation since the president took office last week.

Trudeau, in a tweet, said Canada would welcome those fleeing “persecution, terror and war. Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith.”

Prime minister Theresa May, who is applying double standards with President Trump, decided to keep silent over the Muslim Ban by alleging that it is an American domestic issue. Her failure to condemn the persecution of refugees and Muslims has caused a wave of indignation in British society. In response, more than one million people have already signed a petition to demand that Theresa May cancels her invitation to Trump to visit the UK.

The leader of the major party of the opposition Jeremy Corbin said:

“President Trump’s executive order against refugees and Muslims should shock and appal us all. “Theresa May should have stood up for Britain and our values by condemning his actions. It should sadden our country that she chose not to. After Trump’s hideous actions and May’s weak failure to condemn them, it’s more important than ever for us to say to refugees seeking a place of safety, that they will always be welcome in Britain.”

So far the only ally who has supported the Muslim Ban has been Australia. Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said:

“I’m confident that the Australian government and the U.S. government will continue to support each other in ensuring that we can implement our strong immigration and border protection policies,” Ms Bishop said in Los Angeles.

“The Australian government is working very closely with the administration and the US officials and we want to ensure that Australians continue to have access to the United States, as they have in the past, and people from the United States have access to Australia.”

Treasurer Scott Morrison also jumped to Mr Trump’s defence, reasoning that the newly-elected president was simply fulfilling an election promise.

In his first two weeks as president, Trump has:

1. Divided American society.

2.Violated international law.

3. Violated the first amendment of the U.S constitution.

4.Violated human rights of refugees and Muslims.

5. Made numerous enemies from all over the world.

6. Helped terrorist groups to recruit thousands of new members.

7. Endangered U.S. troops in the Middle East.

8. Endangered U.S. travellers.

Trump’s actions are already isolating the U.S. from the international community. Furthermore, the lack of critical thinking in society will make citizens from all over the world think that the vast majority of Americans approve Trump’s unethical policies. It will cause serious problems to millions of American travellers, who will be judged for something that they did not choose.

Fortunately, the protests against Trump’s executive order to persecute Islamic society shows that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. If Trump continues violating the law and American society continues holding mass protests, President Trump may then be impeached by the congress. If it ever happens, Pence who is politically smarter than Trump and is backed by most of Republicans elected would try to implement a catholic- evangelical system based on reforming the education system and denigrating women.

American society will have to be very attentive with the upcoming events. History shows that protests are useful, but unless something really shocking happens they will not have any real impact. In 2008, when the global financial crisis started, there were millions of citizens who held protests for years in countries such as Spain. However, the Spanish authoritarian government reacted by oppressing all the protesters without contemplations on a regular basis. Finally, this movement turned into a political organisation, which is strong, but was created too late. For that reason, if American society really wants to change the existing situation, aside from holding protests against the government, it should also create an alternative to replace the two major parties in the U.S.

The Republican and Democrat parties have been alternating the U.S. presidency for decades, which means that the corruption is already instilled in all layers of both organisations.

The upcoming turbulent times will determine whether global society can protect their human rights or not. Every single person from all over the world has the responsibility to resist any government attack against other human beings regardless of political and religious orientation.

Resisting against those who abolish human rights and violate the law on a regular basis is not bad, rather, it is everyone’s obligation for the sake of our children.

Be attentive, defend your neighbours, and never keep silent over injustices.